Archives for the month of: September, 2016

The Columbus Dispatch reported the judge’s ruling against ECOT, which is fighting to block accountability and transparency for use of public funds.

“A judge today denied a request by the state’s largest online charter school to stop the state from requiring that it produce attendance records to justify the $106 million it got last year in state funding.

“Franklin County Common Pleas Judge Jenifer French ruled in favor of the Ohio Department of Education, rejecting a preliminary injunction request by the Electronic Classroom of Tomorrow that would have immediately blocked the state from using log-in records and other data to determine how many full-time students actually attend the school

“The department has already completed its attendance audit on ECOT for last school year. The ruling means ECOT could be forced to repay tens of millions of dollars based on recent state calculations that its enrollment numbers last year were heavily inflated.

“French wrote that ECOT does not have a substantial likelihood of success on any of its claims in the lawsuit. A 2003 funding agreement at the heart of ECOT’s argument against the state was only meant to apply for the 2002 and 2003 funding reviews, French said.

“Enforcing an outdated 2003 agreement would be in violation of public policy,” French wrote. “The Court finds that if the funding agreement were interpreted in the manner that ECOT suggests, to require the state to continue paying hundreds of millions of dollars per year, without any ability to determine whether students are in fact participating in any curriculum at ECOT at all” would violate public policy.

“The ruling comes four days after the Department of Education informed ECOT that, based on its attendance audit, the district’s reported enrollment last year was inflated by 143 percent. Instead of the 15,322 full-time students that ECOT was paid for, the department said that based on log-in durations and other data provided by the school, the actual number is 6,313.”

The Electronic Classroom of Tomorrow (ECOT) lost in court today! This is an e-charter owned and run for profit by William Lager, who is a big donor to the Ohio GOP. The school has the lowest high school graduation rate in the nation but has never been held accountable for its poor performance.

Here is the story from Stephen Dyer of Ohio Innovation.

“Word came out a few minutes ago that ECOT’s lawsuit has failed. The school, which claimed to be the nation’s largest, now may have to repay Ohio taxpayers more than $60 million of the $109 million it received last year because the state determined ECOT could only verify it had 40 percent of the 15,000 plus kids it claimed. The state still pays ECOT so much per pupil that even with this cut(and including all of its revenue streams), ECOT can still clear as much as 22 percent profit after paying all of its staff.

“Now I know ECOT will use every maneuver to overturn this ruling from Franklin County Common Pleas Judge Jenifer French. There will be appeals.

“But what a day this is for Ohio’s kids and taxpayers.

“Since Lager opened ECOT in 2001, Ohio’s taxpayers have sent the school $903 million. If the state’s recent determination that ECOT was overpaid by 60 percent last year were applied over the last 15 years, Ohio taxpayers have sent about $540 million for kids that ECOT never really had. That’s a staggering figure. And it’s not outrageous to make that assumption because ECOT was nailed by State Auditor Jim Petro during its first year of operation for the exact same thing.

“And what have we received for that? Certainly not high-quality education. ECOT earned only Fs on the new state report card — something it also achieved two years ago under the less difficult state report card regime.”

Chris Savage of Eclectablog writes about the disasters of privatization in Michigan.

There are at least three public services, he says, that should never be privatized:

Healthcare, education, and prisons.

Why? Because the bottom line is profit, not service or quality.

Yet Governor Snyder just can’t get over his certainty that privatization must work, if only he can find the right vendor. He can’t. The incentives to game the system for profit are too great, and they are baked in.

I confess that I once believed that Governor Jerry Brown of California would be a great friend to public education.

I was wrong.

Jerry Brown is in the pockets of the powerful charter lobby.

He previously vetoed a bill to ban for-profit charters, soon after a series of investigative articles in the San Jose Mercury News showed that the for-profit online K12 Inc. schools were educationally disastrous bit highly profitable. From Governor Browm: let the profit-making continue!

This week, he vetoed SB 739, which would have established very modest regulation for charter schools that expand into other districts. Carol Burris explained it in this post:

“When the Van Zant story broke, the California Charter School Association agreed that the case raised legitimate concerns. However, legislation to address the problem of districts authorizing charters in other districts, and even other counties, was opposed by the California Charter School Association (CCSA) and vetoed by Gov. Jerry Brown in 2014. A present bill on the governor’s desk, SB 739, would put a small restriction on a district’s ability to open independent learning center charters in other districts by ensuring that the sponsoring district is fiscally solvent (does not have a negative certification), thus decreasing the profit generating motive.”

The California Charter School Association wants no restrictions, no limitations, no transparency, no accountability. They want for-profit schools, and they refuse to clean their dirty house.

And Governor a Jerry Brown dances to their tune. How sad. He doesn’t need their support. He doesn’t need their money. He won’t run for office again. Yet he has succumbed to the privatization movement, those who would destroy our communities and the public education system.

EduShyster (aka Jennifer Berkshire) interviews Yawu Miller, editor of Boston’s Bay State Banner, about charters and Question 2, the November referendum on lifting the cap.

http://edushyster.com/tag/bay-state-banner/

Miller is not anti-charter. Nor is he pro-charter. He has applied to charters for his own children. But he understands the widespread concern that charters will weaken public schools.


Yawu Miller: What I’ve noticed in the debate in Boston is that people are not against charter schools. They think that there is a place for them. They think that charter schools work well for some people, maybe for their own children. But they don’t want to see the kind of expansion that’s being proposed now. They think there’s a threat to the district school system if that happens. You hear a lot of people saying *I’m not anti-charter. I’m against this ballot question.* I think the funding issue has caused a lot of people who pay attention to the schools to come out strongly against this.

Nancy Bailey expresses her astonishment that corporations and universities continue to fund TFA even though there is no evidence for its efficacy. By sending inexperienced teacher aides to replace veteran teachers, they are harming children and degrading the profession.

Open her post to see the long list of gold plated donors. Would they also fund Airline Pilots for America? No, that matters. Why ruin education by demeaning real teachers? Bailey proposes a name change: Teaching Aides for America.

The reality is that TFA supplies the temp labor force for non-union schools, specifically, charter schools.

The following comment reflects a teacher’s view of Donald Trump. She thinks he is running because he wants to be the most popular boy, the one who always wins. She thinks he is like a student in middle school or high school. Based on what he has said, I am inclined to think his behavior is more fitting for a six-year-old. In the primaries, he ran an ugly picture of Ted Cruz’s wife online, and when Cruz complained, Trump said to Anderson Cooper on CNN, “He did it first!” When asked about his odd admiration for Vladimir Putin, Trump said, “He praises me, and I praise him” (or words to that effect).

President of the Class

By Jane K. Marshall

I must admit that I once momentarily wondered if perhaps Trump’s candidacy was an incredible ruse to help Hillary win. I mean, it seemed so obvious that Donald wasn’t really interested in the job. He even seemed to not understand what the job entailed, nor did he do anything to educate or enlighten himself as to particulars. He just went about “being Trump” — albeit a cartoonish Trump. Was it all a joke? To what purpose?

I now believe that Donald is incapable of this sort of joke or an elaborate subterfuge. He is merely a high school (or junior high school) boy running for the president of his class. Like many boys in that position, he seeks not to actually do anything substantive to improve the well-being of his classmates. No. He is primarily engaging in a popularity contest. He wants to feel important. He needs to feel important. Or more to the point, he needs constant attention.

As a former teacher, I’ve seen like characters in action — the children who disrupt classes in order to call attention to themselves. I well remember a boy who valued such interaction above all else — craving positive or negative attention. It seemed not to matter which. Of course, there are usually background reasons for such behavior. Whenever possible, the empathetic teacher tries to encourage positive behavior and then reinforce such behavior with praise. Whenever possible, this same teacher tries to ignore the negative pleas to be noticed — occasionally a near impossible task.

Sometimes it is even necessary to remove a negative-attention-seeking student from class temporarily, so as to deny the response he seeks while at the same time ensuring the needs of his classmates. Frankly, such an emotionally needy child causes angst to himself, his peers and the adults in his sphere, for usually the attention-seeking scenario plays out on numerous occasions. However, with patience and empathy in play, more often than not, the child eventually learns to cope with the idea of appropriate connections with others. He grows up. He won’t be 13 forever.

Unfortunately, in Trump’s case, negative behavior has been rewarded with the constant notice of mass media. He has garnered millions of dollars of free advertising with obnoxious and puerile language. And while this was going on, the rest of the “class” was put on hold. (Would that a Bernie Sanders had been allowed such a platform.)

The teacher in me wishes to deal constructively with Donald Trump — saving him from himself while ensuring that those around him are saved from his singular dominance of the landscape. Let’s face it, Trump has managed to hold court — creating the tenor of this entire election cycle. So, while my empathetic side envisions treating Donald Trump humanely and without rancor, I do not condone ignoring the pressing problems that affect us all in so doing. Therefore, as insulting as it may seem, let me speak directly to Donald: “Grow up! If this doesn’t happen, you must leave the class.”

Having said all of that, this former teacher, of course, realizes that Donald Trump is not running for president of his class. He is running for the office of the President of the United States. He certainly must be denied the position. There can be no question about that.

Note: A friend, upon reading this piece, raised the question of stake-holders in the episode of an unruly student. “Where is the principal, guidance counselor? More important, why do other students leave it to the teacher rather than speaking up: ‘Hey, Trump kid, we want to learn. Stop your foolishness or get out!’?”

Why, indeed?!

In the previous post, I pointed out that the Nevada Supreme Court overruled the funding of vouchers.

Jeb Bush’s Foundation for Excellence in Education hailed the same decision as a major step towards educational “freedom,” meaning no more public schools.

Since there is zero evidence that choice produces better education but ample evidence that it intensifies inequity and segregation and destabilizes communities, you can consider the press release either an affirmation of rigid free market ideology or lunacy:

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

September 29, 2016 Contact: Press Office
850-391-4090
PressShop@excelined.org

Nevada Families One Step Closer to Educational Freedom

Today, the Nevada Supreme Court ruled that Education Savings Accounts (ESA) are constitutional. Nevada’s ESA program is the most expansive educational choice program in the nation.

Specifically, the court agreed with the state that the primary constitutional arguments brought by plaintiffs against ESAs are without merit. Although the court ruled against the state on a funding issue, it laid out a clear blueprint for addressing the funding technicality so that the 8,000 parents who have applied for an ESA are able to take advantage of greater educational opportunities for their children.

“The court’s ruling that ESAs are constitutional is a significant victory for Nevada families,’’ said Foundation for Excellence in Education (ExcelinEd) CEO Patricia Levesque.

“I look forward to Governor Brian Sandoval and the legislature addressing the funding mechanism for the state’s ESA program so that all Nevada parents have the right, as well as the resources, to choose the best education option for their children.”

ExcelinEd filed an amicus brief in the Nevada Supreme Court in support of the state’s position in the Duncan vs. State of Nevada case. The amicus curiae was prepared by Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP.

Learn more about Education Savings Accounts:

Nevada’s Education Savings Account (ESA) legislation, which passed in 2015, provides parents of up to 450,000 eligible students in the state with the funding to select schools, tutors and other approved education services for their children, including necessary therapies for students with disabilities.

Since the first Education Savings Account (ESA) program was introduced in 2011 in Arizona, this policy has been changing education as we know it.

ESAs place state dollars designated for a child’s education into an account that parents can direct in a manner that is best for a child’s unique needs.

Account funds can cover multiple education options, including private school tuition, online education, tutoring and dual enrollment, and unused funds can be saved for future K-12 or higher education costs.

ESAs create an entirely flexible approach to education, where the ultimate goal is maximizing each child’s natural learning abilities.

The Nevada Supreme Court blocked the funding of the state’s sweeping voucher program, which would have given money to every student to spend anywhere. Despite the total absence of any evidence for the efficacy of such programs, the Nevada legislature undoubtedly will go back to the drawing board to devise another voucher giveaway that won’t improve education but will divert funding from the state’s underfunded
Unlicensed schools.

The Nevada State a Constitution has explicit prohibition against sending public money to sectarian schools, but that hasn’t stopped the anti-constitutional impulses of the Republican majority.

What part of the Nevada constitution does the legislature not understand?

The Constitution of the state of Nevada clearly states in Article 11:

Sec: 9.  Sectarian instruction prohibited in common schools and university.  No sectarian instruction shall be imparted or tolerated in any school or University that may be established under this Constitution.

Section Ten.  No public money to be used for sectarian purposes.  No public funds of any kind or character whatever, State, County or Municipal, shall be used for sectarian purpose.
[Added in 1880. Proposed and passed by the 1877 legislature; agreed to and passed by the 1879 legislature; and approved and ratified by the people at the 1880 general election. See: Statutes of Nevada 1877, p. 221; Statutes of Nevada 1879, p. 149.]

I was just in Nevada. I was taken aback by the luxurious hotels and promiscuous spending in Las Vegas. An additional 1% sales tax would be a boon to the public schools. But the legislature offers choice instead of resources.

Why won’t the legislature fund the education of the kids in public schools, as the Constitution commands?

Is it because they don’t care about the kids, the kids whose parents clean the hotels and wash dishes in the restaurants?

Or are they protecting the 1% who own the casinos, hotels, and restaurants?

Or they just don’t give a damn about the Nevada state constitution?

El Camino Real Charter High School used to be a public school. It was always a good school. But now it’s embroiled in a financial scandal because its principal used the school credit card to charge lavish indulgences, including first class air travel, meals, hotels, and other items connected to his other job as a talent scout for a major basketball team.

The teachers are not happy.

Taxpayers should be picketing too.

http://www.dailynews.com/social-affairs/20160928/el-camino-real-teachers-stage-silent-protest-over-credit-card-spending-controversy